Lack of equal coverage

The media and the courts have had a very interesting relationship concerning many different coverage issues. This reading shows that there is a lack of proper coverage on Supreme Court cases and those that do get coverage, are lacking adequate information to right an accurate story. There is a large emphasis on presidential stories and the judicial branch of the government.
The Supreme Court justices themselves remain out of the media except in hearing occurring before appointments to the Court. In these cases, the judges are subject to public scrutiny and opinion. These hearings have the ability to sway judicial politics. Supreme court coverage is very important to the public because it informs them of what is going on in the government and how it affects them. It is difficult to cover for journalists because it is hard to make into an interesting story and there are fewer journalists covering the beats.
The important cases of Engel v. Vitale and Baker v. Carr show how the media can have serious misrepresentations in their stories. In the newspaper coverage of these trials there were errors and misleading headlines. Crime is getting more coverage these days than ever before and it has created the CSI effect which leads to people having misleading thoughts of crime because of the media. The “tabloidization” of crime is also a part of media coverage of court cases that has negative effects. In the cases of O.J. Simpson and Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky the case coverage dominated the media over other important issues that directly involve the public. The press coverage becomes a zoo in trial like these because the public can’t get enough of the famous people in trouble.
The Supreme Court bands reporters from all of its deliberations before the announcement of decisions because it is important to send the correct message to the public and those involved with the trial. Television and video coverage are also banned from using live coverage as well.
The CSI effect is a very interesting phrase to describe how members of the public and jurors in court can sway their opinions on a trial. I feel this is an accurate claim and a serious issue to be discussed. The media can create a reality for some and it is different when it involves people who love to watch movies and read books that are filled with crime cases that are enhanced for attention. This type of media can sway people and in a trial it can mean the possibility of making the wrong decision based on the dream world of television and movies.
The scenes the jury draw their information from are unreal and only familiar to them because that is what television is supposed to do. Television and movies are meant to create a reality for the viewers to keep them entertained and engaged. Jury members may take this fake reality and apply it to a case they think they have seen before, but really it is separate affair.